International Journal of the Physical Sciences Vol. 6(28), pp.

6565-6571, 9 November, 2011

Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/IJPS
DOI: 10.5897/IJPS11.894
ISSN 1992 - 1950 ©2011 Academic Journals

Full Length Research Paper

The evaluation of stone column and jet grouting soil

improvement with seismic refraction method: Example
of Poti (Georgia) railway
Devrim ALKAYA1*, İbrahim ÇOBANOĞLU2, Burak YEŞİL3 and M. Ş. YILDIZ4
1
Pamukkale University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Denizli, Turkey.
2
Pamukkale University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Geology Engineering, Denizli, Turkey.
3
Düzce University, Düzce Vocational School of Higher Education, Construction Program, Düzce /Turkey.
3
PM Prestij Engineering Company, İstanbul, Turkey.
Accepted 30 September, 2011

Studies of surface improvement have been carried out in Georgia-Poti in order to decrease surface
deformations since surface conditions of railway line that comes from the harbor are too poor. Stone
column and jet grouting methods were evaluated together as surface improvement methods. As
engineering parameters on the surfaces which are applied, jet grouting are higher than the other
method, it was decided to improve the line within project with this method. This study was carried out
in order to present surface parameters obtained with seismic refraction data carried out together with
surface improvement practices. Findings show that parameters of shear wave velocity, amplification
rate and bearing power obtained with jet grouting practices are higher than those of stone column
practices.

Key words: Jet grouting, seismic refraction, soil improvement, stone column.

INTRODUCTION

In condition where problematic surfaces carry risks for
engineering constructions, surfaces can be adapted as
expected with various soil improvement methods. Bored
pile, soil injection, stone column, vibro compaction and jet
grouting are common methods used for this aim.
Previous similar projects are of importance in order to
determine the suitable soil improvement method in
relation to project. In soil improvement, how far are the
surface conditions improved compared with the beginning
should be known. However, it is often hard and long to do
it.
In this study, stone column and jet grouting practices
carried out at and around the station structure planned to
be constructed within a railway line and their
improvement performances were determined with a
geophysical seismic measurements carried out on-site.
For this aim, surface before improvement and surface
profiles which are applied separately with both
improvement methods were measured.
Study field includes the area of the river reach of Rioni
which moves to Black sea in Poti which is the coastal
town of Georgia (Figure 1). Railway line is constructed on
the alluvium sediments brought by the river.
There are many studies in literature which examine design
styles, bearing capacities and effective factors of stone
columns in different conditions (Greenwood, 1970; Hughes
and Withers, 1974; Shankar and Shroof, 1997; Ambily and
Gandhi, 2004). Similarly, there are references about design
characteristics of jet grouting practices (Bell and Burke,
1994; Covil and Skinner, 1994; Stroud, 1994; Wong et al.,
1999; Wong and Poh, 2000, Sağlamer et al., 2002; Lunardi,
1977; Poh and Wong, 2001). However, there is no study in
which the performances of both stone column and jet
grouting practices are evaluated. Therefore, the study
stands out as the premier for practice conditions. It is
thought that the study will give light to future studies.

*Corresponding author. E-mail: devrimalkaya@hotmail.com. Tel: Geology of study field

+90 258 2963354, Fax: +90 258 2963382.
Study field and its surrounding is generally composed of a thick plio-
Abbreviation: SPT, Standard penetration test. quaternary stack based on volcanic and volcanic sedimentary. This
6566 Int. J. Phys. Sci.

Figure 1. Aerial photograph of study field (Taken from

http://maps.google.com).

a. Stone column practice b. Jet grouting practice.

Figure 2. Soil improvement studies carried out in study field

stack is generally composed of peat clay – silt and fine-grained
sands which are drifted related to wide river systems and their
shunts. In the test pit and borings drilled in the study fields; young
stack composed of primarily silt-clay and partly sand was observed.
was done on another region within railway location.
Stone columns were done by compressing and stoning aggregate
into 80 cm diameter wells. It was projected as forming 80 cm
columns in jet grouting practices. Figure 2 shows stone column and
jet grouting practices carried out in a,b.

Soil improvement studies

Railway passes over a soil profile where there are young alluvial
sediments. Due to this soil structure, there has been need for soil
improvement study before the construction of railway. For this
reason, first of all, a stone column study was carried out on a
certain region around railway line. Then jet grouting manufacture
Soil characteristics and application of seismic refraction
practice
In order to determine mechanic and seismic parameters of
improved soil, both standard penetration test (SPT) and reciprocal,
seismic refraction measurements along three (3) profiles were
 Alkaya et al. 6567

Figure 3. Underground profile and change of V p speed obtained with seismic tomography.

Table 1. Line 2 obtained from the area where soil improvement was not done and
surface parameters obtained from field studies.

Parameter Environment 1 Environment 2

Vp (m/s) 229 266
Vs (m/s) 90 113
G (kg/cm2) 100 215
B (kg/cm2) 512 906
E (kg/cm2) 281 598
Vp/Vs 2.54 2.35
Soil class D D
qs (kg/cm2) 1.09 1.87
qa (kg/cm 2) 0.43 0.79
Compressibility 0.005388 0.004448
SPT - N 5.33 11.31
3
Bed coefficient (t/cm ) 1218.18 1381.61
Amplification rate 1.7
Rate of impedance difference 0.58

done. Measured locations are named as Line 1, Line 2 and Line 3.
Line 1 was chosen in jet grouting field, Line 2 was chosen where
there is no soil improvement practice. Line 3 was chosen in the
area where stone column improvement was done. Geophone
distance was chosen as 2.0 m and shooting point distance was
chosen as 2.0 m as well in seismic measurements. In the study;
Geometrice seismic measurement device, 14 Hz geophones and
other seismic equipments were used.
Areas which cannot be improved
Surfaces which are composed of sand, silt and peat type organic-
originated clays have too low surface values with their natural
status. Study fields have put forward that SPT values of the unit are
quite low (N30 = 4 - 12). Allowable bearing value found depending
on seismic speed is around 0.4 kg/cm2. From the empirical
calculations depending on N30 values, cohesion value was found
between 5 and 10 kPa, angle of internal fraction was between 1
and 5.
A test pit of 5.0 m was bored in order to define surface lithology on
site. This stack which was defined as current stream bed sediment
was observed to have 0.0 to 2.0 m granular embankment, 2.0 to 4.0
m grayish bluish silt sand and 4.0 to 5.0 m organic sand additive
sandy silt. With the drillings, it was put forward that the stack
sustains this condition. Figure 3 presents surface profile obtained
with seismic tomography and change of V p speeds.
With soil examinations, liquid limit value was 19.12%, plastic limit
value 16.67% and natural water content of the soil was found to be
12.50%. According to Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
classification, it was detected that the surface was in the group of
ML surface group (inorganic silt and very-fine sand).
Seismic parameters obtained with seismic refraction studies and
SPT average values obtained with field drilling in this area where
soil improvement was not carried out as given in Table 1.
Areas which are improved with stone column
Stone columns are often used in the improvement of soft and loose
6568 Int. J. Phys. Sci.

Figure 4. Schematic demonstration of stone column practice.

Table 2. Line 2 obtained from the area where stone column improvement was done
and surface parameters obtained from field studies.

Parameter Environment 1 Environment 2

Vp (m/s) 176 278
Vs (m/s) 77 135
2
G (kg/cm ) 68 308
2
B (kg/cm ) 266 894
E (kg/cm2) 189 828
Vp/Vs 2.29 2.06
Soil class D D
qs (kg/cm2) 0.87 2.24
qa (kg/cm 2) 0.38 1.09
Compressibility 0.006626 0.00401
SPT – N 7.24 16.03
3
Bed coefficient (t/cm ) 930.93 1429.76
Amplification rate 2.6
Rate of impedance difference 0.39

surfaces. With this practice, it is possible to decrease consolidation
duration depending on field and soil conditions, increase bearing
capacity and prevent liquefaction. Ground subsidence can be
decreased up to 50% with stone column practices. Apart from this,
stone column practices are commonly used for minimizing the
liquefaction on surfaces which are suitable for liquefaction during
earthquake rather surface improvement. The practice includes
compression of aggregate placing it into well-hole which is drilled
(Figure 4).
In this study, first of all, stone column manufacture was done for
soil improvement in railway line. The practice was done by
compressing and stoning aggregates in 20 mm dimensions into 70
mm diameter wells. Stone columns length of 8 m. Seismic
measurement and field studies carried out following stone column
practice show that both seismic parameters and SPT-N values
increased (Table 2). Allowable bearing value found depending on
seismic speed is 2.0 kg/cm2.
Areas which are improved with jet grouting
Jet grouting is a well known soil improvement technique which is
able to create consolidated elements in the subsoil with different
shapes and dimensions and also with good mechanical
characteristics and reduced permeability. The technique involves
eroding and mixing the in situ soil with water cement grout (Figure
5). The grout mix is jetted, with the aid of special tools, at very high
speeds (800 to 900 km/h) created by high pressures (400 to 500
bars = 7.000 to 9.000 psi).
In the other part of study, 80 cm of columns were prepared and jet
 Alkaya et al. 6569

Figure 5. Schematic demonstration of jet-grouting practice (Küçükali, 2008).

Table 3. Soil parameters obtained from Line 1 taken from the field which is improved
with jet grouting and from field studies.

Parameter Environment 1 Environment 2

Vp (m/s) 414 675
Vs (m/s) 210 341
G (kg/cm2) 629 2057
B (kg/cm2) 1605 5318
2
E (kg/cm ) 1669 5467
Vp/Vs 1.97 1.98
Soil class C C
qs (kg/cm2) 2.94 5.92
qa (kg/cm 2) 1.49 2.99
Compressibility 0.002653 0.001629
SPT – N 38.11 > 50
Bed coefficient (t/cm3) 1864.322 2397.748
Amplification rate 2.0
Rate of impedance difference 0.50

grouting practice was done in the improvement area of jet grouting
columns length of 11 m. With the practice carried out, it was seen
that there is an increase in soil seismic parameters and in SPT-N
values. Allowable bearing value which is around 0.4 to 0.5 kg/cm2 in
its primary condition has increased to the level of 2.9 to 3.0 kg/cm2.
Table 3 shows seismic refraction measurements and SPT-N values
obtained from field studies after jet grouting practice.
Figure 6 presents images from seismic refraction practices
applied to all soil profiles explained above for the evaluation of soil
improvement performances.
class is C for the soil which is improved with jet grouting. Soil class
is defined as D for other conditions.
Table 5 presents soil parameters which are not improved, which
is improved with stone columns and jet grouting all together.
As can be observed in Table 5, seismic speed and elasticity
parameters obtained in the field improved with jet grouting are
higher than that of stone column improved. Allowable bearing
values of each environment calculated from seismic speed values
are given in Table 6. Findings show that bearing power of soil
improved with jet-grouting is 50% higher than that of stone column
improved soil.

Evaluation of soil improvement performances

Eurocode 8 (EN, 1998) groups soil into four (4) according to their
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
shear wave velocity (Vs30) (Table 4). Evaluation of shear wave
speeds obtained with seismic refraction studies shows that soil Stone column and jet grouting are commonly used impro-
6570 Int. J. Phys. Sci.

Figure 6. Images from seismic refraction studies carried out in study field.

Table 4. Soil classification according to Vs30 values in Eurocode 8 (EN, 1998).

Soil class Description Characteristics (m/s)

A Rock or rock-like formations Vs > 800
B Very hard sand, aggregate or very hard clay 360 < Vs ≤ 800
C Hard or medium-hard sand, aggregate or hard clay 180 < Vs ≤ 360
D Cohessionless soil from loose to medium-hard 180 > Vs

Table 5. Change in the parameters of speed and elasticity according to soil conditions.

Soil condition Vp (m/s) Vs (m/s) Vp / Vs E (kg/cm2) G (kg/cm2) Soil class

Unimproved soil (Line 2) 245 102 2.45 440 100 D
Stone column improved soil (Line 3) 278 135 2.06 828 308 D
Jet grouting improved (Line 1) 675 341 1.98 5467 2057 C

Table 6. Allowable bearing values obtained for soil which improved and not
improved with jet grouting.

Study field Allowable bearing values (kg/cm2)

Natural soil surface 0.4
Stone column improved area 2.0
Jet-grouting improved area 3.0

ving methods in the scope of soil improvement. However,
evaluation of performances after applications is not done
in most of the engineering projects. In fact,
superiority of improving methods should be known and
its utilization for the suitable engineering projects must be
carried out.
Seismic refraction studies are suitable geophysics
studies that can be used in order to determine change in
seismic parameters of soil on a surface which is
improved.
In this study, performance of stone columns and jet-
grouting practices carried out in the location of railway
which is dominated by poor soil conditions. For this
reason, both seismic refraction and on-site tests were
carried out on the field. All the data obtained show that
soil conditions obtained with jet grouting practices are
higher than those of stone column practices.
Notations: Vp, P wave value; Vs, S wave value; G, shear;
modulus; B, bulk modulus; E, elasticity modulus; Vp/Vs,
frequency rate; qs, dynamic surface bearing power; qa,
dynamic allowable bearing value.
REFERENCES
Ambily AP, Gandhi SR (2004). Evaluation of Stone Column in Soft Clay.
ICGGE International Conference on Geosynthetics and
 Alkaya et al. 6571

Geoenvironmental Engineering. Shankar K, Shroff AV (1997). Experimental Study on Floated Stone

Bell AL, Burke GK (1994). The Compressive Strength of Ground Column in Soft Kaolinite Clay. Proceeding of Indian Geotechnical
Treated Using Triple System. In Proceedings, Grouting in the Ground. Conference held at Vadodara. pp. 265-268.
Edited by A.L.Bell. ThomasTelford. London U.K., pp.525–538. Stroud MA (1994). Report on Session 5 and 6: Jet-Grouting and Soil
Covil CS, Skinner AE (1994). Jet-grouting- a Review of Some of the Mixing. In Proceedings Grouting in the Ground. Edited by AL Bell,
Operating Parameters that form the Basis of the Jet-grouting Thomas Telford. London,U.K. pp. 539–560.
Process. In Proceedings Grouting in the Ground. Edited by A.L. Bell. Wong KS, Li JC, Goh ATC, Poh KB, Oıshı E (1999). Effect of Jet
Thomas Telford. London, U.K. pp. 605–629. Grouting On Performance of Deep Excavation in Soft Clay.
EN (1998). Eurocode 8 - Design of Structures for Earthquake Proceedings of the 5th International Symposiom on Field
Resistance. Measurements in Geomechanics-FMGM99. Singapure, pp. 279-284.
Greenwood DA (1970). Mechanical Improvement of Soils Below Ground Wong JG, Poh TY (2000). Effects of Jet Grouting on Adjacent Ground
Surfaces. Proc. Ground Engineering Conf., Institution of Civil and Structures. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., pp. 247-256.
Engineers. London. pp. 11-22.
Hughes JMO, Withers NJ (1974). Reinforcing of Soft Cohesive Soils
with Stone Columns. Ground Eng., 7(3): 42-49.
Kuçukali N (2008). Demiryolu Altyapısının Jet Enjeksiyon Yontemi Ile
İyileştirilmesi. Yuksek Lisans Tezi ktu Fen Bilimleri Enstitusu.
Trabzon.
Lunardi P (1977). Ground Improvement by Means of Jet-Grouting.
Ground Improvement. ISSMFE Thomas Telford, 1(2): 65-86.
Poh TY, Wong IH (2001). A Field Trial of Jet-Grouting in Marine Clay.
Can. Geotech. J., 38: 338–348.
Saglamer A, Duzceer R, Gokalp A, Yılmaz E (2002). Ground
Improvement by Jet Grout Columns for the Foundations of an
Automobile Plant in Turkey. Deep Foundations 2002. Proceedings of
the International Deep Foundations Congress 2002. Orlando Florida.
GSP No. p. 116.